Curse

Indian · Sep 21, 2006, 11:10 PM // 23:10

when did they changed this?

its long-as helllllll

Savio · Sep 21, 2006, 11:14 PM // 23:14

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...0048336&page=3

They did it on shields too... I dread to look at my monk's equipment.

Ulivious The Reaper · Sep 21, 2006, 11:15 PM // 23:15

yeh they made my fellblade really ugly

Zinger314 · Sep 21, 2006, 11:19 PM // 23:19

I have news from an insider source! The 4th expansion will be called Guild Wars: Idiotproof!

HawkofStorms · Sep 21, 2006, 11:23 PM // 23:23

It happened in todays update.

I agree, it does seem a little TOO long winded. They are doing it to "noob proof" the game. I'm all for a.net changing the wording around of stuff to make it clearer to understand (ie, clearly stating how much damage superior absorption absorbed compared to minor runes), but really, come on.

MORE words does not make something easier to understand!

What's next? "Requires 9 Hammer Master to do the 19-35 damage but does not require it for equiping the weapon or having any of the other mods" on every weapon.

Also, while on the subject of unnecessary word changes to item descriptions, why in the world must weapon mods say "attachs to axe/sword/etc." Can somebody who buys a weapon mod not figure out that a bow string attaches to a bow or a sword hilt attaches to a sword without that sentence in there?

TheMadKingGeorge · Sep 21, 2006, 11:36 PM // 23:36

Oh 1 Thing... Does Elemental Tempest Armor +10 Armor Enchanted Mean + 10 Armor On Any Enchantment Or +10 Armor On Maintaining Enchants

Tookis Elite · Sep 21, 2006, 11:41 PM // 23:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMadKingGeorge

Oh 1 Thing... Does Elemental Tempest Armor +10 Armor Enchanted Mean + 10 Armor On Any Enchantment Or +10 Armor On Maintaining Enchants

srry to use ya as a subject bud

but this is why they changed that. maybe a few people were confused as to which enchants affected the "damage mod" and whatnot.

-it works on any enchants to answer your question

Truong · Sep 21, 2006, 11:49 PM // 23:49

I agree, it is too long. ;l

Nivryx · Sep 22, 2006, 02:58 AM // 02:58

noticed it too, makes my perfect mursaat hornbow look butt ugly, takes two lines - wtheck? i think 'while enchanted' was perfectly idiot proof, change it back =/

bam23 · Sep 22, 2006, 03:00 AM // 03:00

"Under Enchantment" sounds good enough.

That's overdoing it IMO.

Mercury Angel · Sep 22, 2006, 03:05 AM // 03:05

The weird thing is, they left 'while Hexed' alone, which is just as 'incorrect' as that. (which is to say, it was fine.)

BoredJoe · Sep 22, 2006, 03:09 AM // 03:09

Unless A.Net introduce a hex that negates the effect of any enchantment on a character. So the character will be enchanted but not under the effect of any enchantment. o.O

fenix · Sep 22, 2006, 03:36 AM // 03:36

Obviously Anet think the population of Guild Wars players are stupid. You would have to be stupid if you didn't understand "while enchanted", but I suppose it's just them making it easier for kids to play the game...

ubermancer · Sep 22, 2006, 03:43 AM // 03:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoredJoe

Unless A.Net introduce a hex that negates the effect of any enchantment on a character. So the character will be enchanted but not under the effect of any enchantment. o.O

Ohh... cool concept.

fatmouse · Sep 22, 2006, 03:45 AM // 03:45

If I were to guess I would say the dervish enchantments that 'do nothing for x seconds' will no longer count towards the enchanted modifier.

Nathan the Skank · Sep 22, 2006, 03:47 AM // 03:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by talon

Obviously Anet think the population of Guild Wars players are stupid. You would have to be stupid if you didn't understand "while enchanted", but I suppose it's just them making it easier for kids to play the game...

....I still don't get it, do i like, NEED, to be enchanted or is it optional.....

/endsarcasm

gene terrodon · Sep 22, 2006, 01:40 PM // 13:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatmouse

If I were to guess I would say the dervish enchantments that 'do nothing for x seconds' will no longer count towards the enchanted modifier.

One of the few intelligent posts here.

It's obviously because of a change to how some enchantments work.

To have an enchantment on you is different than being under the effects of an enchantment.

Think...then post.

Edit: Hawk, this is a prime example

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guildwiki

Aura of Thorns - Enchantment Spell. All nearby foes are crippled for 4...9 seconds. For 30 seconds, this Enchantment does nothing. When this Enchantment ends, all nearby foes begin Bleeding for 5...13 seconds.

Link here

As you can see, enchanted but not under the effects of an enchantment.
There is a difference.
Not only does this enchantment do nothing for 30 seconds, when it does do something, it doesn't affect the enchanted person, but the enchanted person’s foes. At no point is the caster under the effects of this enchantment, hence the change in the wording for the enchanted mod.

For enchantments that have an effect on your character, there would be no change.

HawkofStorms · Sep 22, 2006, 03:02 PM // 15:02

Umm... no it isn't.
Not all dervish enchantments are like that (god forms for instance diffenantly have an affect). Dervish enchantments can be shattered etc. They are enchantments. If they wanted to introduce a new type of skill called "derish enchantments" that dont' effect the "while enchanted" weapons, they would have just called the derivish enchantments something else (like weapon spells are currently).

frojack · Sep 23, 2006, 09:33 AM // 09:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

Umm... no it isn't.
Not all dervish enchantments are like that (god forms for instance diffenantly have an affect). Dervish enchantments can be shattered etc. They are enchantments. If they wanted to introduce a new type of skill called "derish enchantments" that dont' effect the "while enchanted" weapons, they would have just called the derivish enchantments something else (like weapon spells are currently).

What he said. The fact that they can be shattered and removed assumes that they would also count as 'under the effect'. Even the preorder Dervish weapon has the enchantment condition on it's +15% damage mod. It would be of little use if a large portion of the spammable enchantments don't count.

Also, using terms that question other peoples intelligence is generally a bad idea when all you have to work with is theory. Unless of course arrogance became cool overnight.

Savio · Sep 23, 2006, 12:30 PM // 12:30

Quote:

As you can see, enchanted but not under the effects of an enchantment.
There is a difference.

Wrong. There isn't a difference ingame. Test, check yourself, then post.